Re: [MirageOS-devel] Passing tap devices to the main module

[Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 6 Oct 2014, at 11:43, Richard Mortier <Richard.Mortier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:
> On 5 Oct 2014, at 22:37, Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Block devices have another Xenstore numbering scheme that seems far more 
>> Linux-specific (and afaict, one that only Dave and Mort understand :-)
> 
> pshaw. it's in the code. plain for all to see. somewhere.
> (just don't ask me to remember it... :)
> 
> in a spirit of functorisation, it seems like one should be able to pass in a 
> function that would generate the next device id as part of the configuration 
> of a unikernel, rather than embedding it in some backend library (or even 
> frontend tool). or perhaps that's what providing a device tree would do?

Yes, but what does 'next' mean here?  What happens if you have three devices 
simultaneously hotplugged?  They are mostly independent devices with the only 
connection being the unique identifier that Xenstore gives then (via the 
backend toolchain), so it seems odd that one device would be required to give 
the next one (which is potentially running in a completely separate domain) 
it's identifier.

-anil
_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel